Donate SIGN UP

help please (law)

Avatar Image
was786 | 11:29 Fri 25th Jul 2008 | Law
9 Answers
Jane wishes to attend a rock concert at the Cosmic Theatre, which she has previously done on several occasions. She buys her ticket at the ticket office. The back of her ticket says "all tickets are issued subject to our standard terms and conditions which are available on request". The standard terms and conditions include the words "This theatre accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage or personal injury caused by our negligence". During the evening Candice, the security guard employed by the theatre, accidentally drops her cigarette stub in a waste paper basket. In the ensuing fire, Jane suffers burns and also her valuable camera is destroyed.

Discuss whether or not the exclusion clause may prevent Jane claiming compensation for her injuries and for the damage to her camera. In particular you should consider whether the exclusion clause is a part of the contract between Jane and the theatre, explaining the relevant rules which apply. You should also discuss the application of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 to the scenario.
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 9 of 9rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by was786. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
You should be referring to your set texts and past papers for the answer to this one, not asking total strangers for the answer which may or may not be correct.

However, a company cannot exclude liability for personal injury in its terms and conditions.
Wow this doesn't sound like a uni question in the slightest!

Ethel's right they cannot exclude themselves from their own neglience.

But seriously research your cases and get some decent authority to quote other than The AnswerBank!
well i tried discussing it and everyone if office asked me who jane is so had to give up.

do your own homework will ya!
-- answer removed --
Depends on the type of camera, Tetjam.
If it was a Canon EOS (or equivalent model - as detailed in the 'Supplementary Guidance Notes 24' issued with the 'Rights to Photograph Public Performers' Act 1997, revised in 2004' she would be entitled to make a claim.
And I thought that the limit you quote on plastic surgery claims only applied to breast implants?
-- answer removed --
Sorry Builders Mate but the 'Rights to Photograph Public Performers' Act 1997, revised in 2004' has been completely superseded by the Performing Rights and Digital Cameras Act of 2006 which came into effect from the third Wednesday of June 2007.

Much as I hate to say it, Tetjam is correct.
-- answer removed --
Ah, well. Surely everyone on here is allowed an occasional relapse.

1 to 9 of 9rss feed

Do you know the answer?

help please (law)

Answer Question >>